What's wrong with polygamy anyway?

[challenger]

Leaving aside the fallacy that somehow gay marriage would lead us to polygamy. Even if it did, what's wrong with polygamy anyway. Little rule first though:
You can't appeal to the Bible as a source of morality because (shock news flash) eveybody isn't a Christian and you can't legislate according to Christian morality. If you must make a moral argument on a sexual issue, try to keep it to (A) consent; (B) equality.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

The Patriarchs and other great men in the Tanakh were polygamous, although our Sages tell us that they were exceptions to the general rule and until it was banned, polygamy was very uncommon. Of all the myriad Sages mentioned in the Talmud, ferinstance, none is mentioned as having more than one wife. Jewish law did permit a man to take more than one wife as long as he could support them all equally. But around 1000 CE (what we say instead of "AD"), leading European rabbis pronounced a ban on polygamy, which, as I've said, was never very widespread anyway. This ban was eventually adopted by rabbis in Islamic countries as well, except for Yemen. Polygamy, as rare as it was, was not unknown among the now, all-but-vanished Yemenite Jewish community. Most Yemenite Jews have moved to Israel. While the Israeli Chief Rabbinate has confirmed & reissued the ban on polygamy for all Jews, those Yemenite Jews who came to Israel with more than one wife were not required to divorce all but one. There still are a few elderly polygamous Yemenite Jews still living but as they pass on, the institution will die with them.

I've had pro-polygamists shriek at me that our rabbis are daring to change God's endorsement of polygamy. We do not believe that He has endorsed polygamy at all; rather, we believe that He has given us the sacred institution of marriage & has authorized our Sages to regulate it. Thus, polygamy is something that we can keep or drop; we've chosen to drop it.

There is an exception to the rabbinic ban on polygamy. A man who can get the approval in writing of 100 (orthodox) rabbis may take a second wife. However, this is very, very, exceedingly rare in the most extreme, extreme (to put it mildly). I have heard that a husband whose wife, say, is in an irreversible coma or whose wife is assumed to be dead but whose body has never been found and a rabbinical court does not have enough evidence to rule conclusively that she is dead, might be able to obtain such permission, particularly if they have no children. But I know of no instance where such permission has been given.

I offer http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=8404960#post8404960 vis-a-vis an orthodox Jewish perspective on the whole homosexual; marriage question.

Be well!

ssv

 

[challenger]

The Patriarchs and other great men in the Tanakh were polygamous, although our Sages tell us that they were exceptions to the general rule and until it was banned, polygamy was very uncommon. Of all the myriad Sages mentioned in the Talmud, ferinstance, none is mentioned as having more than one wife. Jewish law did permit a man to take more than one wife as long as he could support them all equally. But around 1000 CE (what we say instead of "AD"), leading European rabbis pronounced a ban on polygamy, which, as I've said, was never very widespread anyway. This ban was eventually adopted by rabbis in Islamic countries as well, except for Yemen. Polygamy, as rare as it was, was not unknown among the now, all-but-vanished Yemenite Jewish community. Most Yemenite Jews have moved to Israel. While the Israeli Chief Rabbinate has confirmed & reissued the ban on polygamy for all Jews, those Yemenite Jews who came to Israel with more than one wife were not required to divorce all but one. There still are a few elderly polygamous Yemenite Jews still living but as they pass on, the institution will die with them.

I've had pro-polygamists shriek at me that our rabbis are daring to change God's endorsement of polygamy. We do not believe that He has endorsed polygamy at all; rather, we believe that He has given us the sacred institution of marriage & has authorized our Sages to regulate it. Thus, polygamy is something that we can keep or drop; we've chosen to drop it.

There is an exception to the rabbinic ban on polygamy. A man who can get the approval in writing of 100 (orthodox) rabbis may take a second wife. However, this is very, very, exceedingly rare in the most extreme, extreme (to put it mildly). I have heard that a husband whose wife, say, is in an irreversible coma or whose wife is assumed to be dead but whose body has never been found and a rabbinical court does not have enough evidence to rule conclusively that she is dead, might be able to obtain such permission, particularly if they have no children. But I know of no instance where such permission has been given.

Hello

That's all well and good, but why ban polygamy?

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Challenger posted:

That's all well and good, but why ban polygamy?

Hmm...

1) The too-much-of-a-good-thing-is-a-bad-thing principle?

2) Speaking from personal experience, I have been blessed to be married to a wonderful woman whom I adore & whom I'm (still!) puppyeyes in love with, for the past 15+ years. I could/would not share my affection for her with another woman. (Egad, to have to juggle two of them??!! I'd collapse within a week! )

3) See http://tinyurl.com/2j8wz & http://tinyurl.com/2heqk.

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv

 

[Suzannah]

Because having two or more wives/husbands (polyandry) is like herding cats. People are not meant to herd cats, and cats are not meant to be herded. Try that sometime.

 

[challenger]

Because having two or more wives/husbands (polyandry) is like herding cats. People are not meant to herd cats, and cats are not meant to be herded. Try that sometime.

I don't get the analogy, could you clarify please?

 

[challenger]

See http://tinyurl.com/2j8wz & http://tinyurl.com/2heqk.

So is it a purely religious thing then? I can understand a rabbinical (I don't know if that's right) ban on polygamy or churches refusing to sanction polygamous unions, but I can't see a legal grounds for banning it.

 

[Suzannah]

I don't get the analogy, could you clarify please?

Imagine yourself with two cats. No, better yet, make it three. Add yourself to the "herd". Now try to control the herd.

 

[challenger]

Imagine yourself with two cats. No, better yet, make it three. Add yourself to the "herd". Now try to control the herd.

Are you saying that monogamy is the only way that human beings can organise

 

[Suzannah]

Are you saying that monogamy is the only way that human beings can organise

Pretty much. At least, peacefully. Or somewhat peacefully.

 

[challenger]

Pretty much. At least, peacefully. Or somewhat peacefully.

The way I see it though, if somebody wants more than one spouse, why not allow it? Even if its a bad idea (the very idea of one wife makes me break out in a cold sweat, never mind two *shudders*), its up to the individuals involved, no?

 

[Fiendishjester]

The problem with the whole discussion of polygamy is that it is always one man who marries more than one woman. If someday, I started seeing that there were single women who had many husbands, then I might consider allowing polygamy to be legal. Currently, it serves to do nothing but subjugate females. If you've ever seen wives who are part of polygamous households, for the most part, they are the most pathetic, brainwashed people on the planet.

 

[challenger]

The problem with the whole discussion of polygamy is that it is always one man who marries more than one woman. If someday, I started seeing that there were single women who had many husbands, then I might consider allowing polygamy to be legal. Currently, it serves to do nothing but subjugate females. If you've ever seen wives who are part of polygamous households, for the most part, they are the most pathetic, brainwashed people on the planet.

I gotta agree that polygamy is often used as a way of subjagating women, but marriage has been used in the same way in the past. The way I see it, we should stop legislating marriage and just have civil unions for everybody who wants them. If you wanna call it marriage that's your choice.

 

[Suzannah]

I gotta agree that polygamy is often used as a way of subjagating women, but marriage has been used in the same way in the past. The way I see it, we should stop legislating marriage and just have civil unions for everybody who wants them. If you wanna call it marriage that's your choice.

Well I would agree that that does seem to be the trend of the future. In Orthodoxy we consider marriage to be a Holy Sacrament. Now I do not expect non-Orthodox people to agree, but I would say that if what you suggest becomes the norm, we Orthodox will simply carry on as we have always done with regard to this Holy Sacrament. I will only comment this far and say that I do feel that to stop "legislating" marriage, will cause an uproar, not just in Christian societies but among those sub-cultures of the West which are traditionally non-Christian, i.e. Muslims, Hindus, etc. These folks won't take it kindly either.

 

[seebs]

Having been one of two husbands for a while, I am inclined to say that I am not convinced that there is a moral problem with polygamy, but there are practical problems which I believe merit careful consideration. I don't see any reason to outlaw it; I also don't see any reason for most people to pursue it. The circumstances that might make it a viable or reasonable option are unusual at best. In the case of the relationship I was in, the major practical barrier was that two of the three people involved were not, in fact, ready for any kind of commitment... If we'd known this, we would have done things differently, and might still be together today.

I think the problem is that people tend to assume that the spouses aren't all at least getting along. In many ways, I was closer to my wife's first husband than I was to her, at the time. I still sometimes miss him. Given that we're both straight, this is not a sex thing... But he was a really cool guy to hang out with, and we had common interests, so we spent a lot of time up late drinking coffee, playing cards, and working on musical projects.

If "polygamy" means "one man gets to boink multiple women without really making up his mind", then I guess I can see the objections to it. If "polygamy" means "sometimes, the relationships people are drawn to are a little more complicated", then I guess I don't see a problem. The observation ssv makes, that it is something we can take or leave, and the Orthodox Jewish Rabbis have mostly agreed to leave it, seems a fairly reasonable one. There is no inherent moral censure here; there is merely a practical observation that, at least for now, there's not much of a compelling reason to do this. There are people who might find such a reason, and I would not wish to stand in their way.

 

[inHisgrip]

Isn't pologamy illegal??
If I am correct, thats reason enough for me.
If not, and I have no way to back up this statement, its just icky!
People will most likely be hurt and I think it could be damaging to children involved.
Again, its just icky wrong
IMHO
In Him

 

[ssms27]

Leaving aside the fallacy that somehow gay marriage would lead us to polygamy. Even if it did, what's wrong with polygamy anyway. Little rule first though:
You can't appeal to the Bible as a source of morality because (shock news flash) eveybody isn't a Christian and you can't legislate according to Christian morality. If you must make a moral argument on a sexual issue, try to keep it to (A) consent; (B) equality.

Why can't we (as Christians) make legislation according to Christian morality? Why should it matter if we get our morality from the bible? Laws are often based on our own individual morals. We often vote for candidates with the same morals. I thought it was might right as a citizen to try to have my morals reflected in the law. I say try as of course it must follow democratic principles. Why would I want to have laws that don't reflect my morality?

What are you referring to by Polygamy? Two husbands, wives or any combination you can think of?

Well, if I had two wives I think I would never get to watch any of my guy shows on TV. That would not be cool.

Now practically speaking its hard to get two people to agree on anything, so it would be make it more difficult by adding more opinions to the table. That makes for more fights and divisions within the marriage. Also, there could be jealousy between two partners. Of course these problems exist in a normal marriage but I think adding one or people to the marriage would enhance the problems. This could lead to a greater number of divorces.

Steve

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Challenger posted:

So is it a purely religious thing then? I can understand a rabbinical (I don't know if that's right) ban on polygamy or churches refusing to sanction polygamous unions, but I can't see a legal grounds for banning it.

Yes. There are no strictly legal grounds per se for banning it.

Seebs posted:

The observation ssv makes, that it is something we can take or leave, and the Orthodox Jewish Rabbis have mostly agreed to leave it, seems a fairly reasonable one.

Thanks!

There is no inherent moral censure here; there is merely a practical observation that, at least for now, there's not much of a compelling reason to do this.

Correct.

Be well!

ssv

 

[Theresa]

Stillsmallvoice,

I do not at present, understand how you and orthodox judaism would judge moral or immoral. From what I can tell, your stance on birth control is the same as the Catholic Church's, that it can only be used for health concerns which take precendence and to us that is only if the birth control aspect is merely a side effect instead of the purpose in taking it.

Does birth control fit into the heading of moral or immoral?

If you sleep with your wife while she is menstruating, does that fit into that category as well?

As for polygamy, can you give me some more information from your perspective of how it came to be in the first place?

You have stated that if a man were to marry two women, that sexual relations between the women is forbidden, correct? Would their sexual relations be considered immoral in that case?

From our perspective of course, on the issue of polygamy, Christ gave a new law which reflected his original intent for mankind and marriage, and the position that a woman deserves within marriage, for male and female He created them, equal. He also elevated marriage to a sacrament.

 

[The Bellman]

its just icky wrong

This does not strike me as a reasoned and rational answer.

If "because I don't like it" is the only answer you can come up with, then you have no answer at all. Your distaste for a practice - despite the fact that it has been practiced many, many times in history - is irrelevant to whether or not it is, in fact, wrong, bad, or should be illegal.